The poster did not "tie this bit of javascript to the NSA". She/he argues that blindly acquiescing to removal of rights in the name of security is a bad idea, using the NSA phone tapping deal as a point of comparison.
Removal of rights? Saying that either this JavaScript or the NSA's actions amount to a removal of rights is a huge stretch. You might as well compare the the sealed battery on the iPhone to the NSA's data gathering.
I half-disagree with you: the NSA's actions, IMHO, certainly do amount to a violation of the right to privacy. However, calling the ability to run the javascript development console on a page a 'right' is a stretch, I agree.
Please feel free to read the actual article and quote it and find fault with its conclusions. As it is now you're seizing on individual words, not ideas. If this were a Turing test you wouldn't be doing so well.
Reread what you just posted. You just said that the poster's comparison to the NSA is invalid, which is exactly my point. Why does everything around here have to be tied to the NSA (see Gruber's ridiculous conspiracy theory about the Apple bug for a recent example), and why does half of the stuff posted about the NSA have to be hysterical nonsense like that they're recording all our phone calls? It removes legitimacy from the rest of us who are complaining about things the NSA actually does.
